Jump to content
Rolling Thunder Forums

Players to Police Cheating Players


Recommended Posts

Players,

 

For those of us who have been playing PBM for awhile, we all can recall players we have encountered who actively work to find ways of pimping the rules, but not break them. There have been (and will always be) PBM players who are very good at finding the weak spots in a game design (loopholes, questionable tactics, etc.) that result in dis-honorable game play. Some people will do whatever they can in a PBM game to get an edge - it has been that way as long as I've been involved in PBM (over 20 years for me). While they may succeed in gaining an advantage for themselves in a game, they effectively ruin the game for many others and demoralize the newer recruits we all work hard to introduce to our fine hobby.

 

Victory! is one of those games where it is up to us, the players, to punish those players who wreck the game for others.

 

An ideal game of Victory! might be one where all 40 nations are played to the bitter end and where all nations have their own best interests at heart all the time but that will never happen. There are rules and code in Victory! that are present for no other purpose than to limit abusive situations when it comes to undermining defenses and cooperating in questionable ways. Unfortunately, these rules will never be enough to ensure a completely fair game. There are rules in the game that limit collusion - limits on the money you can transfer to another, limits on what territory you can cede and how much you can cede per turn, limits on the material you can give another nation, etc. all for the direct purpose of preventing certain abuse if they were not there.

 

HOWEVER

 

There is no rule, indicating that you must effectively defend your nation from a specific enemy or cooperate in ways that could be "questionable" to others. It is this PRACTICE that has been pimped in a great way in Game 84, and perhaps in others as well.

 

As you may have noticed, Baltic States conquered xMoscow and xYelnya on TURN 6. Impressive.

6 TURNS later he conquered xDnepropetrovsk and xKarlauka. Huh?

2 TURNS later he is in Stalingrad, with unscathed forces. No way.

 

It is evident that collusion and dishonest play had to occur as Central Russia has moved forces out of the way for Baltics to take resources and pop centers unopposed. Do the math, plot the path and you decide how it could be accomplished in any other way than planned collusion.

 

I do not know their name, whether they are new or old, or anything else about them. This is based purely on data gathered in game. This is the sort of player that makes good games miserable. It is up to us, the players of game 84 to punish this player.

 

I call upon you to assist in shutting them down by all declaring war to slam his morale negative, then we all force peace upon him. It is the only tool we have to try to keep Victory! honest and weasels at a minimum.

 

South Russia

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 50
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Players,

 

For those of us who have been playing PBM for awhile, we all can recall players we have encountered who actively work to find ways of pimping the rules, but not break them. There have been (and will always be) PBM players who are very good at finding the weak spots in a game design (loopholes, questionable tactics, etc.) that result in dis-honorable game play. Some people will do whatever they can in a PBM game to get an edge - it has been that way as long as I've been involved in PBM (over 20 years for me). While they may succeed in gaining an advantage for themselves in a game, they effectively ruin the game for many others and demoralize the newer recruits we all work hard to introduce to our fine hobby.

 

Victory! is one of those games where it is up to us, the players, to punish those players who wreck the game for others.

 

An ideal game of Victory! might be one where all 40 nations are played to the bitter end and where all nations have their own best interests at heart all the time but that will never happen. There are rules and code in Victory! that are present for no other purpose than to limit abusive situations when it comes to undermining defenses and cooperating in questionable ways. Unfortunately, these rules will never be enough to ensure a completely fair game. There are rules in the game that limit collusion - limits on the money you can transfer to another, limits on what territory you can cede and how much you can cede per turn, limits on the material you can give another nation, etc. all for the direct purpose of preventing certain abuse if they were not there.

 

HOWEVER

 

There is no rule, indicating that you must effectively defend your nation from a specific enemy or cooperate in ways that could be "questionable" to others. It is this PRACTICE that has been pimped in a great way in Game 84, and perhaps in others as well.

 

As you may have noticed, Baltic States conquered xMoscow and xYelnya on TURN 6. Impressive.

6 TURNS later he conquered xDnepropetrovsk and xKarlauka. Huh?

2 TURNS later he is in Stalingrad, with unscathed forces. No way.

 

It is evident that collusion and dishonest play had to occur as Central Russia has moved forces out of the way for Baltics to take resources and pop centers unopposed. Do the math, plot the path and you decide how it could be accomplished in any other way than planned collusion.

 

I do not know their name, whether they are new or old, or anything else about them. This is based purely on data gathered in game. This is the sort of player that makes good games miserable. It is up to us, the players of game 84 to punish this player.

 

I call upon you to assist in shutting them down by all declaring war to slam his morale negative, then we all force peace upon him. It is the only tool we have to try to keep Victory! honest and weasels at a minimum.

 

South Russia

 

While not in game 84 I do comment on above statement.

 

First of all. In love an politics EVERYTHING is allowed. :( Ofcourse this is rubbish but I guess it means you can expect dirty tricks. Whatever the rules some people will cheat. It happens in computer games, in PBM and in real life. Will it make them feel better? I guess so because why else would they do it? Do I dislike them? No not really. Do I look down upon them? Absolutely!

 

I myself like to uphold the old standards of Prussia. I love a good, honest, one vs one fight. Even if I loose a game I know I did my best. I will try to fight or play till the last turn.

 

How to prevent cheating? I could quoute Sun Tzu, Machiavelli, Friedrich the great, Von Clausewitz Bismark or Von Manstein. But I guess Clint Eastwood has the solution... 'You improvise, you overcome, you adapt'. MAKE HIS PLAN WORK AGAINST HIM! SIM TC & EM's are your friend. Early in the game do some EM AFD's on the enemy provinces. If you see 0 LDB... He's either a beginner (are there any beginners in Vic?) or somebody setting up an easy defeat. Set up some armor and strike hard and deep...

 

Just one tactic I dreamed up in a minute. Remember it's a game. Enjoy it and make sure the cheaters don't enjoy it.

 

 

Von Manstein

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While I absolutely agree with both of you, I must point out there's a fine line between a careful reading of the rules to develope a 'new' approach and manipulation of them to create a guaranteed win [usually in the eye of the beholder] that, sadly, too many people seem willing to cross. There will always be those who opt for the latter.

 

We will never get away from them and every thing I've thought up comes with a built in loophole.

 

No TA's at all? They'll just play around it.

Identify 'Group' players with a SIM-POL? They'll just not declare.

Eliminate the 'Privacy Option'? Has potential, but raises certain ethical questions.

Publish a complete list of Player/Avatar & Country in 'Hall of Victory'? Takes way too long but might help years down the road.

Drive them 'negative' & Force Peace? Ok, which country do you start with?

 

Like Von Manstein, I believe in fighting the old way; but that only works with opponents who feel the same way. I would love to play under those conditions [see Special Variant #9 & #11].

 

The logic behind using a position to allow another to gain massive 'Victory' points completely escapes me but there are always those who live vicariously thru the achievements of others. This brings 'couldn't of done it without me' to a whole new level.

 

I, for one, will continue to play on a somewhat higher level but we do need a vehicle to identify these people so we can quickly eliminate them and get on with the business at hand!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When players are acting unethically, heck, let's just call it what it is, cheating, the players themselves need to do something about it. Of course, sometimes other wars get in the way, and yes, it does ruin the game for everyone. I hope you nuke him. :(:ph34r:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I feel we ran into this situation in the early part of game 82 at some level. But even if you know it is going on it is very hard to identify who specifically is involved and almost impossible to prove.

 

Eliminating privacy option and identifying avatars with countries is a lost cause to solving that problem. All you need to have multiple avatars is multiple e-mail addresses. I personally believe spongbob has about half a dozen avatars. (In no way am I accusing him of below the board tactics but using him as a reference to being able to have multiple avatars.)

 

The best way to deal with this problem is to recognize when it is going on and then simply communicate to other players in the game and try to put a stop to it. there will always be cheaters no matter what the game but I strongly feel that 99% of the RTG community are honorable players. Some of us may not get along with others and battles and postings can get heated but I think in the end we all respect each other enough at the end of the day to say good game and move on to the next one. :(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I feel we ran into this situation in the early part of game 82 at some level. But even if you know it is going on it is very hard to identify who specifically is involved and almost impossible to prove.

 

Eliminating privacy option and identifying avatars with countries is a lost cause to solving that problem. All you need to have multiple avatars is multiple e-mail addresses. I personally believe spongbob has about half a dozen avatars. (In no way am I accusing him of below the board tactics but using him as a reference to being able to have multiple avatars.)

 

The best way to deal with this problem is to recognize when it is going on and then simply communicate to other players in the game and try to put a stop to it. there will always be cheaters no matter what the game but I strongly feel that 99% of the RTG community are honorable players. Some of us may not get along with others and battles and postings can get heated but I think in the end we all respect each other enough at the end of the day to say good game and move on to the next one. :(

 

Yeah I ran into this in game 83 too. A certain player gobbled up Iraq in like 3 turns then he gobbled up Turkey until Southern attacked Turkey also, and Turkey suddenly came to life and focused everything on Southern totally ignoring the attacks by Persia that were gutting him.

 

There was another player in game 83 that was going around and recruiting everyone to go after that guy playing Persia 83 and his TA who was playing Syria 83 because he felt they had done something similar in a previous game. He played Central Russia 83.

 

This same player started recruiting people again at the beginning of game 84, to go after the same two players in game 84. I wonder if anyone can guess who the two players being targeted were? Can you also guess who was trying to recruit people to kill them in 83 and game 84? I think Monk can guess because that guy went after Monk also I am told. Guesses anyone? Want to guess what country this guy was playing in game 84?

 

Race Pilsner

Link to comment
Share on other sites

However, we should address the problem and the question. If it seems obvious that the Baltics has stormed through seemingly unprotected provinces, taking key cities and is way further than he could realistically be after 15 turns, what are we, as the players, going to do about it if we have to police ourselves?

 

Stalingrad's idea of all other players DW on him and then forcing peace on him would be justice.

 

However, there are many more players who have more experience than I dealing with this (this is my third game) and they have to have some suggestions and recommendations on how to keep OUR game honest.

 

If I cannot believe that this game is honest, or cannot be kept honest, I have no interest in playing what is an otherwise excellent game.

 

Of course, maybe the Baltics and Central Russia (he has to be in collusion) players will man up and let us know who they are and why they did what they did so before "parking lot" justice is applied, they can state their case.

 

Just how many countries would have to DW on him/them before the force peace option, and morale being so low they could never DW again, would work?

 

King Zarkon

 

"My country deals with theft by cutting off hands, we have an amazingly low theft rate too"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just wondering about why other rapid conquests in 84 aren't being brought up here also?

 

Canada owns all of the USA, that was certainly suspicious. Look at the swiftness of the conquest of Algeria by Tunisia and company. That was unusual, especially since Algeria was a late add and could have easily been picked up by one of the invaders' friends so the gates would be wide open.

 

I will raise my voice about these, and I'm sure the honorable players above will also want to denounce those nations as well. Sauce for the goose is after all sauce for the gander, right? I'm totally sure the comments above are not just propaganda, and that all concerned will absolutely want a consistant standard applied. To want otherwise would be hypocritical. Let's hear it guys! Let's DW all of them!

 

Race Pilsner

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am playing in Game 84 also. This is my second game and I have been enjoying it thus far. This is a game that requires alot of careful planning, manuevering and negotiating. A fair match of ones skills versus other players skills.

 

Now, like others, I have observed with dismay the progress that Baltic States has made through Central Russia and into Southern Russia. Even to me, a "newb" to this game, it is obvious that something right isn't going on. I find it highly unlikely and improbable that Baltic States could have made the progress he did without the active cooperation and "rolling over" of the player playing Central Russia. Even if Central Russia had fallen under computer control it would have mounted a better defense than what is happening now.

 

Yes, Southern Russia, who is suffering the most from this unethical conduct is a TA, but my feeling on this subject would be unchanged even if he was my bitter enemy (in game terms).

 

I know that no rule perse is being broken. There will always be players that try to "game" the system. This goes beyond that. Those of us who are playing the game in the spirit it was intended will be handicapped when it comes to victory conditions because of players who practice this type of play. Baltic States gobbling up Central Russia with no opposition will have a huge advantage in this game (Game 84) and skew the results.

 

Others have agreed that what is happening is unethical and not in the spirit of the game. We, as the players of this game, must police ourselves. I join Southern Russia in asking that us players punish Baltic States as much as we can. Even though it will hurt me in game terms I will DW Baltic States. If this behavior is not punished it will continue to occur in every game this player plays in. If we, the VIE community, can not police ourselves as a group and ban such unethical gamemanship then I will have to reconsider my investment in time and money.

 

SgtBalicki

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sir Pilsner,

 

Yes, like you I found the rapid conquest of the US by Canada suspicious also. But I don't know the facts there. Did the US player drop and the US go under computer control? Don't know. I reckon only Russ knows for sure.

 

Did Central Russia drop and go under computer control? From the evidence it does not appear so. The computer does not move static divisions and builds LDBs in many provinces.

 

As far as Algeria goes I can give first hand knowledge of that. I don't know why, but the Algerian player dropped. The computer took over and has been building statics and LDBs from the get go probably. So, there has been a defense. I was bounced three times at the city xAnnaba, twice at xTebessa, and at least once at xAlgiers thus far. Yes, it has been far easier than if a human was controlling the country, but it has been a fight nontheless. There were 10 statics in xAlgiers. I have TASed and attacked them down to six right now. There were six statics in Bayadh. Morocco just attacked there and drove them into xBayadh. Now there are 12 statics in xBayadh. That will still be a tough nut to crack. So, even under computer control you still have to fight. Any provinces that have a decent POP rating have LDBs. So no drivng through the open plains with no opposition. Each province has to be attacked.

 

What has happened in Central Russia is the active collusion and cooperation of the CR player to move defenses out of cities and not build any more divisions of LDBs so that Baltic States can just waltz through.

 

I cry "SHAME!!"

 

SgtBalicki

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sir Pilsner,

 

Yes, like you I found the rapid conquest of the US by Canada suspicious also. But I don't know the facts there. Did the US player drop and the US go under computer control? Don't know. I reckon only Russ knows for sure.

 

Did Central Russia drop and go under computer control? From the evidence it does not appear so. The computer does not move static divisions and builds LDBs in many provinces.

 

As far as Algeria goes I can give first hand knowledge of that. I don't know why, but the Algerian player dropped. The computer took over and has been building statics and LDBs from the get go probably. So, there has been a defense. I was bounced three times at the city xAnnaba, twice at xTebessa, and at least once at xAlgiers thus far. Yes, it has been far easier than if a human was controlling the country, but it has been a fight nontheless. There were 10 statics in xAlgiers. I have TASed and attacked them down to six right now. There were six statics in Bayadh. Morocco just attacked there and drove them into xBayadh. Now there are 12 statics in xBayadh. That will still be a tough nut to crack. So, even under computer control you still have to fight. Any provinces that have a decent POP rating have LDBs. So no drivng through the open plains with no opposition. Each province has to be attacked.

 

What has happened in Central Russia is the active collusion and cooperation of the CR player to move defenses out of cities and not build any more divisions of LDBs so that Baltic States can just waltz through.

 

I cry "SHAME!!"

 

SgtBalicki

 

Your explanation of the situation in Algeria I accept on your word. Now I will just cry out, DW on Canada too! Canada is deeply suspect in my eyes. It's not that easy to take over the USA so quickly.

 

You've hit the nail on the head about Central Russia also, I think Sarge. Central Russia is almost entirely 0 population provinces. In that big a country the computer doesn't spend much effort building defenses in 0 pop areas. In fact it may not build anything in those. A lot of small mech or armored forces of 1 division each could sweep through 20 to 30 provinces per turn easily even if they all had LDB's. In the 9 turns since the DW (assuming a decent rate of growth in forces), that means roughly 90 to 135 cities and provinces could be captured, probably most of them with little or no defenses.

 

If the player in Central dropped the computer wouldn't take over for 60 days after the first missed turn. That's potentially 5 turns. Baltic took xMoscow on turn 6 or 7. That means if Central stopped sending in turns after losing his capitol it may have been turn 11 to 12 before the computer took control of the nation. Since the last turn was 14 that's not much time for the computer to build defenses. My world news shows xDnepro and xKarlauka baing taken on turn 12.

 

I also find it somewhat confusing that no one mentions that Northern Russia has taken a large piece of Central Russia and Northern attacked first on turn 3 while Baltic States attacked after day one of turn 4. It's been some time since I played Central but I remember how challenging it was logistically. I wouldn't relish trying to defend it from attack on two ends at once by two countries that could focus on that task only.

 

This certainly has the appearance of a purposeful rush to judgment to gain benefit over another country by assasinating that players character in an attempt to get others to join in. But this is after all the Propaganda Section. It's not unusual for players to try and gang up on anyone who does too well early on.

 

Stalingrad V80 (Southern Russia) has lost xPinarbasi (world news last turn) and is at war in Turkey (captured xBatman). Somehow I doubt that Turkey is just letting him walk into his nation unopposed.

 

Southern is clearly stretched out with a terribly long line of supply and was fighting on two widely separated fronts. Easy to see why he would be a target for a third front and if that 3rd attacker moving in quickly it would be advantageous in the extreme for said attacker.

 

If I were Northern I'd probably be trying to open a fourth front in fact against him if I could. Southern is a logistical nightmare to begin with, the Caspian Sea cuts the nation nearly in half making it difficult to rail materials around. Assuming Stalingrad V80 has lost his capitol as well as the area around xPinarbasi, he only has the xBatum AIC area left in the SW and the Kumertau AIC area in the high north. The Kumertau area would be a natural target for Northern who captured xYoshkarola about turn 11 and xUstinov about turn 12. He could potentially be closing in on the North border of Southern Russia very soon.

 

Not very enviable. Maybe all Southern has left to throw at a 3rd attacker is sticks and stones. Kind of looks that way. What will be left to throw at a 4th I wonder?

 

Race Pilsner

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Spongebob

I'm not in this game no more, swiftly defeated, fairly I may add. However what some are proposing could be a damaging and problematic path to follow.

 

It seems that a mass DW on someone is the only course of action that can collectivley be delivered. I for one was threatened with this myself, not for cheating but for being a pain in the arse. It ultimatley failed because there was no concensus and I countered the possability by DW first.

 

But you must also ask yourself this, What If your assumptions are wrong?

 

We must all face the facts that there are some low lifes in this world, even lower than a Sponge. Realise this and then move on, play with honour, play in character, play for fun.

 

My most hated enemy the Monk has been a pain in my arse for many years now and I believe some of his tactics to be unsavoury but I would never say he is a cheater, I would never dishonour him personally and can say with conviction that if he turned up on my door step I would buy the man a drink (then punch his lights out :( )

 

Get over it people, move on and know your own honour is un-tarnished.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dear All,

 

I knew it, I knew it, I was defeated by cheaters in this game(???).

 

Well that is something, that is an issue. We can write and write tons of messages that definitely will not do the trick. Cheaters, or let me call it players playing the game with all options the (a) game offers, you have always. And on desire we can all use the same trick. Okay we don't want to because we really want to play and win on honest turns (??). We all know the saying: in war and love everything and anything is allowed.

Game rules will absolutely not change or alter people’s attitude or behaviour, forget that. There will always be loopholes in games as it is in real live. Thousand and thousand of years there are laws for everything, and still is this in process. But still there are people or circumstances that will do every effort to adjust this to there advantage.

 

I would say: beat them on the battlefield and kick them out of the game with the game, meaning TA only those you trust or believe and you are feeling comfortable with. Back stabbing to me is allowed, some others call this diplomacy, but what the heck, keeps the game alive.

 

Greetings Rednas “the clean player” I guess…but who knows for sure….

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As far as Algeria goes I can give first hand knowledge of that. I don't know why, but the Algerian player dropped.

 

FYI, the former Algerian player is a friend of mine, after playing a few turns, he had to drop because his job took him offshore. Note that the computer build ldbs in all provinces, not just populated ones.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am not sure if all these suspicions are really facts. Computer controlled position are easy to conquer, especially if the old player never build a single LDB. If the Statics are converted to normal divisions and moved to a border and the player dropped then all cities are completely undefended. We cannot blame player who conquer such a position, we should blame the one who never build any defense. Of course the Baltic story sounds suspicious, but it is not impossible. I saw two time the Sponge ruining himself (as enemy and ally) with in turn 3 or 4, so I know it is possible.

 

To answer Race question: I know Persia and Syria in game 83 from several other games before. Edwin plays Persia and Tim plays Syria. I was Syria’s TA in game 69 and I am Persia TA in game 79. They do not need a Zombie position to play a good game. It is not difficult to kill Iraq in three turns if you are Syria and Persia. I cannot explain the Turkey story, but sometimes you really met crazy players in these games.

 

I know Central 83 as Jack Suttorp, but I am sure this is an alias. I do not know why he does not like Edwin, Tim or me. Because we were never all three TA in one game I think he had different reasons to dislike us. In my case I am sure he now has a reason to do that.

 

Michael alias The Monk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share


×
×
  • Create New...